Let's discuss designer stimulants: (S)-diphenyl-2-pyrrolidinyl-methane (serious)

[placebro]

In 1982, Pro-Line was started in Beaumont, California to provide the radio control (R/C) car enthusiast (our consumer) with a quality line of aftermarket performance accessories at an affordable price. Today, Pro-Line is one of the most respected and successful 1:10 scale R/C car, tire wheel, and accessory manufacturers in the industry. Pro-Line established a reputation for quality and performance in all three areas of the accessory market: tires, wheels, and bodies. In 1992, Pro-Line's off-road tires dominated the racing scene by capturing seven off-road National Championships.

In 1993, Pro-Line's domination continued at the IFMAR World Champion-ships by sweeping both the 2WD and the 4WD classes in Basildon, England, Pro-Line's second and third World Championship titles. Two years later, in 1995, Pro-Line won it's fourth and fifth IFMAR World Championships at the Yabate Arena in Japan.

In 1995 Pro-Line purchased PROTOform Race Bodies, partnering with founder Dale Epp to expand the body market share and solidify Pro-Line's leadership position as an accessory manufacturer. Dale Epp has stayed in partnership with the Pro-Line team to create the best body accessory company in the industry. Dale's attention to detail and mold preparation combined with advanced vacuum-forming processes, meticulous decals, and window masks have created industry leading products. Pro-Line's collective company goals are to lead the industry's accessory market and drive technological advances for our customers.

[eldawg]

What the hell... it looks like they typed in proline to google and took the first titles that came up. These have nothing to do with anything in the product. Now it cannot be claimed whatsoever that the labeling was not intended for anything but deception. Even if they claim "creative nomenclature," citing this research is a blatant lie.

And the evidence keeps growing...

[EMISGOD]

What the hell... it looks like they typed in proline to google and took the first titles that came up. These have nothing to do with anything in the product. Now it cannot be claimed whatsoever that the labeling was not intended for anything but deception. Even if they claim "creative nomenclature," citing this research is a blatant lie.

You can't imagine how much this information utterly shocks me...

[nano.ix]

So did they not cite there sources of research before on this 'proline' before?

[in10city]

So did they not cite there sources of research before on this 'proline' before?

They did as part of their write-up. Those aren't after the fact of this exposure.

[nano.ix]

They did as part of their write-up. Those aren't after the fact of this exposure.

Interesting. So no one ever thought to read the citation prior to ingesting. To think, this could have all been avoided.

[in10city]

Interesting. So no one ever thought to read the citation prior to ingesting. To think, this could have all been avoided.

They cited the two noted above, which are basically irrelevant to the compound here. That's what I thought you meant. There definitely was no mention of 2-d compound.

[nano.ix]

They cited the two noted above, which are basically irrelevant to the compound here. That's what I thought you meant. There definitely was no mention of 2-d compound.

I know what you meant. I was referring to people pointing out the sketchy-non-relevant data on their proposed ingredient. I don't think many would take a product knowing that the data that supports it is gibberish.

[No1]

Let's face it: every compound, that causes enhanced fat loss, has potentially serious adverse side-effects. Just as every compound, that causes enhanced muscle gain, has potentially serious adverse side-effects. And in each case, the stronger the compound, the worse the side effects.

If supplement companies were only free to state the truth on their labels, we could avoid a lot of these problems. But the intrusive, freedom-destroying nanny-state insists on sticking its nose where it doesn't belong and forces companies to pretend that compounds are safe, even when they known damn well that they are not.

Imagine if there were no such thing as a controlled substance, and the only crimes were failing to list clearly all the ingredients of a product, failing to list truthfully what effects and side-effects are expected at what dosage, and failing to list all known interactions with other compounds and health conditions.

Then consumers would have the information they need to decide for themselves what level of performance and risk they are comfortable with. And we would use words like "innovative" to describe companies like AX and ****, instead of "shady."

The root of this whole problem is that government has grown too big for its britches and acts like they have the right to make such decisions for you.

As though your body belongs to them, and not you.

Think about it.

[nano.ix]

Let's face it: every compound, that causes enhanced fat loss, has potentially serious adverse side-effects. Just as every compound, that causes enhanced muscle gain, has potentially serious adverse side-effects. And in each case, the stronger the compound, the worse the side effects.

If supplement companies were only free to state the truth on their labels, we could avoid a lot of these problems. But the intrusive, freedom-destroying nanny-state insists on sticking its nose where it doesn't belong and forces companies to pretend that compounds are safe, even when they known damn well that they are not.

Imagine if there were no such thing as a controlled substance, and the only crimes were failing to list clearly all the ingredients of a product, failing to list truthfully what effects and side-effects are expected at what dosage, and failing to list all known interactions with other compounds and health conditions.

Then consumers would have the information they need to decide for themselves what level of performance and risk they are comfortable with. And we would use words like "innovative" to describe companies like AX and ****, instead of "shady."

The root of this whole problem is that government has grown too big for its britches and acts like they have the right to make such decisions for you.

As though your body belongs to them, and not you.

Think about it.

There is no clinical data on this compound. That is even worse than hiding it in their labels IMO.

[Fitzwell]

Let's face it: every compound, that causes enhanced fat loss, has potentially serious adverse side-effects. Just as every compound, that causes enhanced muscle gain, has potentially serious adverse side-effects. And in each case, the stronger the compound, the worse the side effects.

If supplement companies were only free to state the truth on their labels, we could avoid a lot of these problems. But the intrusive, freedom-destroying nanny-state insists on sticking its nose where it doesn't belong and forces companies to pretend that compounds are safe, even when they known damn well that they are not.

Imagine if there were no such thing as a controlled substance, and the only crimes were failing to list clearly all the ingredients of a product, failing to list truthfully what effects and side-effects are expected at what dosage, and failing to list all known interactions with other compounds and health conditions.

Then consumers would have the information they need to decide for themselves what level of performance and risk they are comfortable with. And we would use words like "innovative" to describe companies like AX and ****, instead of "shady."

The root of this whole problem is that government has grown too big for its britches and acts like they have the right to make such decisions for you.

As though your body belongs to them, and not you.

Think about it.

So why can plenty of other companies play by the rules and do well for themselves? AX bull****ted everyone and lied repeatedly. The facts stare them in the face yet with every post they make (or don't make) they only insult the consumers they have already hurt. If anything, this situation should not be written off as another "blame the government" issue. AX used SX to gain market share with an unfair advantage and in the same way I truly hope they are now destroyed by the market.

[No1]

There is no clinical data on this compound. That is even worse than hiding it in their labels IMO.

In which case they should be required to admit this. After that, it's up to you to decide. It is your body. If you gamble on an unproven compound and lose, it's your responsibility.

As long as a company tells the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about their product, so you can make your decision in full knowledge of everything that is known -- and what remains unknown -- about the compound, then the government should have nothing to say about it.

[No1]

So why can plenty of other companies play by the rules and do well for themselves? AX bull****ted everyone and lied repeatedly. The facts stare them in the face yet with every post they make (or don't make) they only insult the consumers they have already hurt. If anything, this situation should not be written off as another "blame the government" issue. AX used SX to gain market share with an unfair advantage and in the same way I truly hope they are now destroyed by the market.

Because they stay well inside the boundaries and leave the innovation to others.

The intrusive regulatory environment we have today gives the "unfair advantage" to large, entrenched companies with existing distribution chains and large advertising budgets.

Innovation should not be penalized. All that should be required is completely open and honest disclosure.

The government lies about being able to ensure your safety, so it writes its regulations in a way that encourages companies to lie about the safety of their products.

It's not a matter of too much or too little regulation. It's a matter of the wrong kind of regulation.

[dp13368]

First, thank you to all who have helped discovering this (DR P, PA, etc). It would be great for some of the minds with chemist / medical backgrounds could shed some light on the following (to help others):

- Assuming that it is (S)-2-DIPHENYLMETHYLPYRROLIDINE or a variate, what should folks who were taking it do as next steps? (After discountiuing use)
- Are there OTC or Rx that should be taken to (minimize/lessen/reverse?) the effects of having taken the above compound for X period of time?
- I assume blood tests should be taken, what specifically should people be on the lookout for?
- Would a PCP/doctor have any clue if the compound was explained to them as far as their assistance?
- If it impacted the kidney/liver/etc , what should be the course of action ?

[No1]

Your thoughts border on moronic.

Forgive me for not trusting a supplement company for developing new and experimental drugs.

If the fake "Dr.D" wants to play Alexander Shulgin, then he should stick to SELF-experimentation and complete disclosure versus sprinkling this **** in fat loss pills and claiming its PROLINE.

And your reply borders on the insulting.

I am not defending AX or any other company that lies. I am saying we should look beyond the specific instance and examine the root causes.

Like you, I'm advocating complete disclosure.

I've just carried that line of thought a bit farther and indicated what regulatory changes are needed to encourage such disclosure -- in contrast to the existing regulations, which discourage it.

[bjc12]

to put these studies into context with dipehenylpyrrolidinylmethane is hilariously ridiculous.
Because these studies have absolutely nothing, zero, nada, null to do with the designer stimulant. But who knows, perhaps the patent application is based on them....

What the hell... it looks like they typed in proline to google and took the first titles that came up. These have nothing to do with anything in the product. Now it cannot be claimed whatsoever that the labeling was not intended for anything but deception. Even if they claim "creative nomenclature," citing this research is a blatant lie.

thanks for looking into the studies they sited. I was having trouble seeing how they were at all related just from their titles, but thought yu guys could shed some more light on them.

[MrHardness]

bumping after my brain fry.

[catzimm]

I have no background in biochem but I am activeduty military and had been taking this, although i did not experience any of the side effects listed (I get up by 5 every morning and take one pill and after working 10 hours and going to the gym and doing PT for two hours i was able to go to bed at 9 and fall fast asleep) I only had more energy and more focused. I am going to take this thread and the bottle to the section that test for drug users in the military and inquire about it. I have stopped taking this and now i am not sure what supplements are safe to take, up until reading this I only took one pill of this and i drink Xtend in my water and have protein shakes (100% natural whey by ON) but now I am not sure what is safe.... Thanks to everyone for sheading light on this, even though most of thread was way over my head.

[DR_P]

Let's face it: every compound, that causes enhanced fat loss, has potentially serious adverse side-effects. Just as every compound, ...

bingo! just as every compound, e.g. aspirin. potentially, one could die from aspirin (e.g. someone with a history of stomach ulcer), that's why it is ESSENTIAL to EXACTELY KNOW what compounds are in a product that is declared as "dietary supplement" and which is meant for human ingestion.

Whenever companies put much effort to "hide" the active substances from the consumer's eye, and to deceive the consumer with deceptive labels, they are acting wantonly negligent, unethical and accepting potential human hazard or even losses.
Sorry, but such people definitively deserve to go to jail and to never again be allowed to work in the dietary supplement industry.

[nano.ix]

bingo! just as every compound, e.g. aspirin. potentially, one could die from aspirin (e.g. someone with a history of stomach ulcer), that's why it is ESSENTIAL to EXACTELY KNOW what compounds are in a product that is declared as "dietary supplement" and which is meant for human ingestion.

Whenever companies put much effort to "hide" the active substances from the consumer's eye, and to deceive the consumer with deceptive labels, they are acting wantonly negligent, unethical and accepting potential human hazard or even losses.
Sorry, but such people definitively deserve to go to jail and to never again be allowed to work in the dietary supplement industry.

This applies to the formulator and who ever knew about it and pushed it from the get-go. I've been seeing a lot of people here bashing the reps, but in all honesty they probably had no clue about it. From that standpoint a public apology and a step down is what I would do. How can one represent a company who did this? I'm getting off track here.

The formulator and the insides need to be dealt with. It's a little odd off the start that there was never any mention of who formulated this. You look at XF, TL and they are proud about who formulated their products. AX wanted their's hidden for a reason.

One thing I am surprised about though is that the FDA took AX's other product under investigation, but not SX. I would have thought from the sales and talk that they would have been suspicious to say the least.

[Arlecchino]

Deleted e-fighting.

Please remember that this is supplement science, as well as the fact that the serious tag needs to be considered.

Thanks,

Eric

[No1]

bingo! just as every compound, e.g. aspirin. potentially, one could die from aspirin (e.g. someone with a history of stomach ulcer), that's why it is ESSENTIAL to EXACTELY KNOW what compounds are in a product that is declared as "dietary supplement" and which is meant for human ingestion.

Whenever companies put much effort to "hide" the active substances from the consumer's eye, and to deceive the consumer with deceptive labels, they are acting wantonly negligent, unethical and accepting potential human hazard or even losses.
Sorry, but such people definitively deserve to go to jail and to never again be allowed to work in the dietary supplement industry.

I certainly do not approve of any company selling any product without telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about it -- especially when it impacts the health of the customer.

But I think there's more to the picture than just that. Some of the responsibility rests on the consumer who chooses to use a product without knowing what it is. But a much larger part of the responsibility rests squarely on the government, for creating such an unjust and excessively restrictive regulatory environment.

Without a doubt, the right thing for AX to do would be to put a big black-on-yellow skull and crossbones on the bottle, and a big red label that says

Warning: This Stuff May Kill You!
We Mean It!
Use Extreme Caution!
Consult Your Doctor!
And Your Psychiatrist!
We're Not Kidding!
But It Does Burn Fat
Like There's No Tomorrow.

Now, if they could do that without painting a big flashing neon target on their backs for the FDA pitbulls to home in on, then the balance of responsibility would be pretty clear.

But as things stand, where does the balance lie? I'm not exactly sure.

All I know is, the picture is more complicated than many in this thread are making it out to be.

[DR_P]

I certainly do not approve of any company selling any product without telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about it -- especially when it impacts the health of the customer.

But I think there's more to the picture than just that. Some of the responsibility rests on the consumer who chooses to use a product without knowing what it is. But a much larger part of the responsibility rests squarely on the government, for creating such an unjust and excessively restrictive regulatory environment.

Without a doubt, the right thing for AX to do would be to put a big black-on-yellow skull and crossbones on the bottle, and a big red label that says

Warning: This Stuff May Kill You!
We Mean It!
Use Extreme Caution!
Consult Your Doctor!
And Your Psychiatrist!
We're Not Kidding!
But It Does Burn Fat
Like There's No Tomorrow.

Now, if they could do that without painting a big flashing neon target on their backs for the FDA pitbulls to home in on, then the balance of responsibility would be pretty clear.

But as things stand, where does the balance lie? I'm not exactly sure.

All I know is, the picture is more complicated than many in this thread are making it out to be.

I see your point and understand what you want to say. In part, I agree with you, but in some aspects I have a slightly different opinion.

Where we dissociate is that IMHO it would already suffice to list the name of the substance on the label. If it is an unknown substance, it is largely in the responsibility of the consumer to inform himself about potential adverse effects and other negative consequences.

Of course, I would prefer to get a comprehensive list of adverse effects in the product write up, but I am aware that companies are not allowed to make any medicinal product claims - and this appears to include adverse effects as well, if I am not mistaken.

If the consumer is aware of this (and I know that many consumers are not aware) it is indeed in his own responsibility to research and gather appropriate information before ingesting anything the potential risks of which he can't immediately judge.

If he doesn't get the appropriate information (because it is not available), then it is again his own responsibility to judge and estimate the projected or supposed benefit to risk ratio, based on different factors such as anecdotal feedback from other consumers, overall reputation of the company etc. This includes the question whether he would be able to achieve similar results (e.g. with regards to fat loss) by other means wit compunds that are better characterized and the risks of which are better known.

At that point, the company in question again plays an important role, especially when giving information about potential adverse effects. For example, reps of said company repeatedly claimed that the stimulant is absolutely safe and that it is only some consumers that just don't understand how to properly use this product.

In this particular case, I think that government regulations have not made and would not make a difference, because it appears that clinical and safety data on this special substance probably doesn't even exist. So, even if the government would allow the free use and distribution of all kinds of designer drugs, the consumer would most likely be in the same or in a similar position: to not know which potentially adverse consequences the ingestion of such a substance would have on him.

[Ghosting]

Thinking about all this had made me realize something. I dont think companies will get away with names that are well disguised or in prop blends. I understand why they do this, but I think the consumer learned a valuable lesson.

[DR_P]

Thinking about all this had made me realize something. I dont think companies will get away with names that are well disguised or in prop blends. I understand why they do this, but I think the consumer learned a valuable lesson.

absolutely. I just stumbled upon a post at the subforum of said company over at Anabolicminds:

I have no, not do I pretend to ever have, knowledge of medicines. However, I would never recommend that someone take SX or any other supplements in conjunction with a prescribed medication. We do not know what the possible outcomes might be and can not advise on taking them together. Your physician would be the person to ask in this case, but from our end, we recommend against it.

The first three sentences are perfectly accurate. But the last sentence is extremely dangerous, because the physicial will look on the product label and read: "Acai berries" - fine; "Cha de Bugre" - fine; "Vitamin B1 analog" - very fine, "Amino acids (l-tyrosine, l-tryptophane, l-proline) - "absolutely fine".
Dear patient, according to the label I don't see anything that would indicate potential contraindications with your current medication. Go ahead and take it.

Stupidly, the physician is totally naive and has not considered that it is a "proprietary formula" where you can put EVERY- AND ANYTHING without properly naming it. Because of the doctors naivety, the patient could easily get cardiac arrythmia, or a stroke.

[No1]

Your're right, we're really not that far apart at all.

But Cheesis K. Reist, man:

... companies are not allowed to make any medicinal product claims - and this appears to include adverse effects as well ...

I rest my case! How does any of this help the consumer?

It doesn't. It only helps big pharma.

This is nothing but the vainglorious posturing of a runaway bureaucracy gone mad with greed!

[djremix]

people have been taking illegal stims for years, witha nd without side effects

i still think SX is nice to have every once in a while. its nicely synergistic with other stuff

might buy another bottle to keep around.

[DR_P]

people have been taking illegal stims for years, witha nd without side effects

they have been taking these illegal stims deliberatly. that's a huge difference. these same people would be extremely pissed if someone had put some drugs into their Acai-Berry-Drink without letting them know.

as long as you are aware of what you are ingesting and aware about potential consequences or at least aware about the lack of any information on potential consequences, it is in your responsibility to decide what you gonna take and what not.

[djremix]

they have been taking these illegal stims deliberatly. that's a huge difference. these same people would be extremely pissed if someone had put some drugs into their Acai-Berry-Drink without letting them know.

as long as you are aware of what you are ingesting and aware about potential consequences or at least aware about the lack of any information on potential consequences, it is in your responsibility to decide what you gonna take and what not.

no arguments there for sure.

was just summorising the product for myself. there is still something about the combination by the way that isnt from the analogue. the effects comes in waves, and get a little different and stronger as time passes. so there might actually be some metabolite causing this.

[UTWahoo]

I found this while searching around to make some sense of the information in this thread (and the other related ones floating around on various forums)--I wanted to get a sense of the kind of people behind the operation of AX. If this is indeed the same Steve Bonnell of AX, this comment on a NY times blog should explain the mentality of these individuals involved perfectly (disclaimer: I'm not completely sure the description of the SB on the comment is indeed the SB of AX...maybe someone can confirm this):

[...]The evil is the kid that goes to Mexico, buys stuff that might be contaminated, gets no real medical advice on how to take the stuff, has no idea how to cycle or do post cycle therapy, has no idea of the impact to his body and how to manage and mitigate it - all because he wants to improve his self image and the absolute best way to do it is illegal. That is the crime.. the legality. If professional sports and Olympic sports want to try to ban it to level the playing field, I am all for it, but that is such a minute part of the population of users and no reason to punish the average person trying to improve their appearance.[...]

By the way, I am 61, 5″9, 175 lbs, with apx 15% body fat. I am certainly no musclehead but I was that skinny kid. I have worked out six days a week for 44 years and have taken both ?legal? and illegal anabolics in my life. I just happen to be very careful about what I put in my body - I certainly don?t abuse it and frankly, find little need to use the illegal stuff when there are so many sports supplements that, while barely legal, work very well.[...]

Full: freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/too-much-ado-about-steroids/#comment-461173

While the conversation above was focused on steroid use and not stim/fat burners, I'd say it's a pretty fitting mentality for the CEO of a company that places questionable ingredients in their products, wouldn't you say?